United States v. Mitchell’s Empirical Analysis
137 F.2d 1006 · 1943
Citation profile
87 federal appellate · 1 district · 18 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 132 later decisions (7 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2024 · most notably Kotteakos v. United States (1946), Pereira v. United States (1954)
87 federal appellate · 1 district · 18 state decisions — followed in 11 states
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 633
Relies on Johnson v. Zerbst · Powell v. State of Alabama Patterson · Adams v. United States Ex Rel. McCann · Betts v. Brady · Funk v. United States
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 132 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Obviously, however, those rights cannot be both exercised at the same time.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(a) In civil and criminal proceedings, a husband or his wife is competent but not compellable to testify for or against the other. (b) In civil and criminal proceedings, a husband or his wife is not competent to testify as to any confidential communications made by one to the other during the marriage.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““In considering the admissibility of the wife’s testimony, distinction must be made between a general privilege prohibiting testimony by one spouse against another and the special privilege as to confidential communications. The latter seems quite thoroughly recognized-and approved in this country, 8 Wigmore on Evidence, 3d Ed.1940 §§ 2332-2341, whereas the former, while also widely recognized except where modified by statutes or limited by exceptions, has been strongly criticized as of obscure origin, uncertain rationalization, and unfortunate results in limiting judicial search for the truth * * *”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.